Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 48 references

Resonance shifts in NbTiN spiral inductors under heat and field are mostly inductive, and geometry sets both temperature sensitivity and field robustness for qubit readout.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-12 09:41 UTC pith:Y3Y4LRAC

load-bearing objection Solid dual-method characterization of NbTiN spirals under warmer, near-tesla conditions; useful design metrics, ordinary experimental caveats. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.00172 v2 pith:Y3Y4LRAC submitted 2026-06-30 quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.supr-con

Superconducting Spiral Inductors for RF Reflectometry: Operation at Elevated Temperatures and Magnetic Fields

Euan Parry , Murat Cubukcu , Patrick Reuvekamp , Manoj Stanley , Jonathan D. Fletcher , Alessandro Rossi This is my paper
classification quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.supr-con
keywords superconducting spiral inductorsNbTiNRF reflectometrykinetic inductancespin qubitsquality factormagnetic-field robustnesselevated temperature
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper shows that NbTiN superconducting spiral inductors, used in RF reflectometry for spin-qubit readout, remain usable at several kelvin and near 1 T, and that their resonance-frequency shifts under those conditions come mainly from changes in inductance rather than capacitance. The authors measure the same devices two ways: as weakly coupled resonators that give frequency and quality factor, and as two-port circuits that give inductance independently. With a single fixed self-capacitance they can rebuild the measured frequency shifts from the measured inductance alone, so capacitive drift is not the driver. They also turn geometry into design rules: the kinetic-inductance fraction sets how much frequency drifts with temperature, and track width sets the field at which quality factor collapses. The point for a reader building compact cryogenic readout is that these spirals can replace bulky surface-mount parts while remaining stable enough for elevated-temperature, in-field spin-qubit architectures, provided track width and kinetic participation are chosen deliberately.

Core claim

Temperature- and magnetic-field-dependent resonance shifts of NbTiN spiral inductors are predominantly inductive in origin. They can be reconstructed from independently measured inductance L(T,B) using one fixed self-capacitance C_self. The same data yield practical design metrics: the kinetic-inductance fraction α = L_k/(L_g + L_k) that sets temperature sensitivity of f0, and a field-degradation scale B_Q that falls with track width and marks the onset of vortex-related quality-factor loss under residual perpendicular field.

What carries the argument

Dual-measurement reconstruction: weakly coupled notch resonators give f0 and Qi, while low-frequency two-port admittance fits give L independently; a single geometry-fixed C_self then rebuilds f0 via f0 = 1/(2π√(L C_self)), isolating inductive origin of the shifts and enabling α and B_Q design metrics.

Load-bearing premise

Self-capacitance is assumed fixed by geometry alone and unchanged by temperature or magnetic field, so any frequency shift can be blamed entirely on inductance.

What would settle it

Repeat the two-port L and notch f0 runs on the same device under deliberately pure in-plane field (misalignment ≪ 0.5°) and check whether the fixed-C_self reconstruction still matches f0(B) within uncertainty, or whether residual f0 disagreement and the B_Q drop vanish when the perpendicular component is removed.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a systematic experimental study of NbTiN spiral inductors intended for RF-reflectometry readout of semiconductor spin qubits, under temperatures of several kelvin and in-plane magnetic fields approaching 1 T. Using two complementary microwave setups—weakly coupled notch resonators (set-up 1) and two-port admittance-matrix inductance extraction (set-up 2)—the authors separate inductive and capacitive contributions. They show that temperature- and field-dependent resonance-frequency shifts are predominantly inductive, reconstructible from independently measured L(T,B) with a single fixed C_self via Eq. (2). Quality-factor degradation is attributed to quasiparticle loss (Eq. 5) and residual-perpendicular-field vortex entry (B_Q). Practical design metrics α = L_k/(L_g + L_k) and B_Q(w) are introduced to link geometry to temperature sensitivity and field robustness.

Significance. If the dual-setup reconstruction holds, the work supplies a concrete, transferable benchmarking framework for superconducting spiral inductors under the elevated-T and finite-B conditions increasingly targeted for scalable spin-qubit architectures. Strengths include independent validation of the inductance extraction against a commercial Coilcraft 100 nH part (Appendix E), consistency of microwave-fitted T_c with DC resistance (Appendix F), quantitative error estimates from circle-fit covariances and bond-wire corrections, and explicit geometry–performance metrics (α, B_Q) that can guide future design trade-offs between footprint, frequency stability and field resilience. The intermediate kinetic-inductance regime of the NbTiN spirals is usefully positioned relative to both surface-mount inductors and more aggressive superinductor approaches.

major comments (2)
  1. Sec. III and Fig. 3(b): the field reconstruction of f0(B∥) from measured L(B∥) plus fixed C_self = 44 fF shows a visibly larger residual mismatch than the temperature case. The text attributes this solely to run-to-run misalignment (θ ∼ 5°). Because the inductive-origin claim for magnetic field rests on this reconstruction, a quantitative bound on residual Bz (or a co-mounted Hall sensor / simultaneous L and f0 measurement on the same cool-down) would strengthen the central claim that capacitive contributions remain negligible under field.
  2. Sec. IV–V and Appendix G: B_Q is defined operationally as the 10 % drop in Qi and is then fitted to a phenomenological vortex-entry model (Eq. G1) that introduces free parameters θ_j and C. While the observed B_Q ∝ 1/w trend is clear, the manuscript should state more explicitly that B_Q is a practical figure of merit under residual misalignment rather than an intrinsic material critical field; otherwise the design metric risks being over-interpreted as geometry-independent.
minor comments (5)
  1. Table I: several L_meas entries are blank (“–”); a short note explaining why only a subset of devices received two-port extraction would improve transparency.
  2. Fig. 3 caption and Sec. III: the two D2 devices used for L(T) and f0(T) are “nominally identical” but physically distinct; a quantitative statement of device-to-device variation (or a single-device dual-setup measurement) would further support the C_self-constancy claim.
  3. Eq. (5) and Fig. 4(b): the quasiparticle model is fitted with essentially one free parameter A; reporting the reduced-χ² or residual variance would help the reader judge the quality of the high-T description.
  4. Appendix D: the ±20 % bond-wire inductance uncertainty is stated but not propagated into the error bars of Fig. 3; adding this would make the L(T,B) uncertainties more complete.
  5. Typographical: “Deviced out n w gLength” header in Table I appears truncated; “UOSM” is introduced without expansion on first use in the main text (only later as Unknown-Thru-Open-Short-Match).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: dual independent measurements of L and f0 provide a genuine consistency test that C_self is constant, not a by-construction identity.

full rationale

The paper's central claim (temperature- and field-dependent resonance shifts are predominantly inductive and reconstructible from independently measured L with fixed C_self) rests on two complementary experimental configurations performed on nominally identical devices: set-up 1 (weakly coupled notch resonators yielding f0 and Qi) and set-up 2 (two-port admittance-matrix extraction of L). C_self is obtained once from the 2 K values of L and f0 via Eq. 2 and then held fixed; the subsequent reconstruction of f0(T) and f0(B) from the measured L(T,B) is therefore a non-trivial consistency check. Agreement would fail if C_self varied appreciably with T or B or if the two setups were inconsistent. The BCS fit for Lk,□(T) and the quasiparticle model for Qi(T) introduce free parameters (Lk,□, Δ0, A, Qother) that are used only to interpret the data, not to define the measured shifts. Design metrics α = Lk/(Lg + Lk) and BQ(w) are likewise extracted quantities correlated against independently measured fractional frequency shifts and quality-factor onsets; they are not predictions forced by the same fit. No self-citation is load-bearing for uniqueness, no ansatz is smuggled in via prior work of the authors, and no known empirical pattern is merely renamed. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained experimental validation, not circular.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 6 axioms · 1 invented entities

The work is experimental characterization resting on standard superconducting microwave models plus a few fitted material and alignment parameters. No new particles or forces are postulated. Load-bearing modeling choices are constant C_self, BCS kinetic inductance, quasiparticle loss, and a phenomenological vortex-entry scale with misalignment angle.

free parameters (6)
  • sheet kinetic inductance Lk,□(0) = 1.74 pH/sq
    Extracted from L(T) fit in set-up 2; used to compute Lk and α for all designs.
  • zero-temperature gap Δ0 and Tc from microwave L(T) fit = Δ0=2.2 meV, Tc=13.4 K
    Fitted with BCS gap form in Eq. 4; cross-checked against DC Tc but still free in the microwave model.
  • quasiparticle prefactor A and Q_other in Eq. 5 = Q_other=2.8e4; A free
    Phenomenological fit to Qi(T) for D1; A is essentially the free scale of activated loss.
  • effective field misalignment angles θ and offset C in vortex model Eq. G1 = θ~5°, Δθ~0.5°
    Used to fit B_Q vs track width across separate runs; ~5° nominal misalignment with ~0.5° run-to-run difference.
  • B_Q definition threshold = 10% Qi drop
    Field where Qi drops 10% from low-field baseline; convenient but arbitrary scale for field robustness.
  • bond-wire inductance correction = ~4±1 nH typical
    Estimated ~1 nH/mm with ±20% uncertainty; affects absolute L by a few nH.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption BCS temperature dependence of the superconducting gap enters Lk,□(T) via Eq. 4.
    Standard dirty-limit kinetic-inductance model; used to fit L(T) in Sec. III.
  • domain assumption Modified Wheeler formula gives geometric spiral inductance Lg from layout (Appendix A).
    Used for design estimates and α; compared to fitted Lg within ~3% for D2.
  • ad hoc to paper Self-capacitance C_self is set by geometry and is independent of T and B over the measured range.
    Working assumption of Sec. III; supported by f0 reconstruction but not independently measured vs T/B.
  • domain assumption Qi degradation above B_Q is dominated by vortex-associated microwave loss from residual perpendicular field.
    Sec. IV–V and Appendix G; alternative quasiparticle/vortex-motion contributions are noted but not separated.
  • domain assumption Low-frequency two-port response is a lumped series R–L with fixture shunt Cg, not spiral C_self.
    Appendix C model used for independent L extraction below ~200 MHz.
  • domain assumption At ~−50 dBm, TLS loss is largely saturated so T/B trends reflect the superconducting film.
    Stated in Methods; isolates film response from low-power dielectric loss.
invented entities (1)
  • B_Q field-degradation scale (10% Qi drop) no independent evidence
    purpose: Practical figure of merit for magnetic-field robustness of spiral inductors under realistic misalignment.
    Defined operationally in Sec. IV; useful metric but not a fundamental material constant, and depends on alignment and threshold choice.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 20011 in / 3665 out tokens · 37281 ms · 2026-07-12T09:41:37.486715+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Superconducting spiral inductors are emerging as key components for radio-frequency (RF) reflectometry, a widely used readout technique for semiconductor spin qubits. Future scalable quantum-computing architectures are expected to operate at elevated temperatures and magnetic fields, placing new demands on the performance and stability of superconducting circuit elements. Here, we present a systematic study of NbTiN spiral inductors under temperatures of several kelvin and magnetic fields approaching 1 T. By combining weakly coupled resonator measurements with independent two-port inductance extraction, we separate inductive and capacitive contributions to device behaviour and directly identify the origin of resonance shifts and quality factor degradation. Furthermore, we establish practical design metrics linking geometry, temperature sensitivity, and magnetic-field robustness. These results provide a general framework for benchmarking superconducting inductors and guiding the design of future RF-reflectometry circuits for practical quantum technologies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.00172 by Alessandro Rossi, Euan Parry, Jonathan D. Fletcher, Manoj Stanley, Murat Cubukcu, Patrick Reuvekamp.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Parallel configuration tank circuit for gate-based [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Device geometry and microwave characterisation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (a) L(T) extracted from the bonded two-port measurements of D2 carried out in set-up 2 (blue circles) and f0(T) extracted from the inductively coupled notch measurements of a nominally identical D2 device carried out in set-up 1 (orange circles). The blue dashed line is the fit discussed in Section III and gives Lg = 106 nH, within 3% of the designed value, and Lk,□ = 1.74 pH/sq. The orange dashed line sho… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Temperature- and field-dependent quality factor degradation. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Design metrics. (a) Fractional frequency shift between 2 K and 8 K as a function of kinetic-inductance fraction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Amplitude of S-parameter response as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Two-point DC resistance measurement as a func [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Calculated minimum outer spiral diameter re [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Temperature and magnetic-field dependence of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    (e) Equivalent circuit diagram for measurements carried out with set-up 2

    (d) ExperimentalS 21 notch response as a function of fre- quency for deviceD 3 at 2 K (red dot) and circle fits (black dashed). (e) Equivalent circuit diagram for measurements carried out with set-up 2. (f) Schematic representation of a spiral wire-bonded to a CPW for 2-port inductance extrac- tion. (g)S-parameter experimental response (dot) and fit (dash...

  2. [2]

    R. J. Schoelkopf, P. Wahlgren, A. A. Kozhevnikov, P. Delsing, and D. E. Prober, The radio-frequency single- electron transistor (RF-SET): A fast and ultrasensitive electrometer, Science280, 1238 (1998)

    1998

  3. [3]

    Ahmed, J

    I. Ahmed, J. A. Haigh, S. Schaal, S. Barraud, Y. Zhu, C.- M. Lee, M. Amado, J. W. A. Robinson, A. Rossi, J. J. L. Morton, and M. F. Gonzalez-Zalba, Radio-frequency ca- pacitive gate-based sensing, Physical Review Applied10, 014018 (2018)

    2018

  4. [4]

    Vigneau, F

    F. Vigneau, F. Fedele, A. Chatterjee, D. Reilly, F. Kuem- meth, M. F. Gonzalez-Zalba, E. A. Laird, and N. Ares, Probing quantum devices with radio-frequency reflectom- etry, Applied Physics Reviews10, 021305 (2023)

    2023

  5. [5]

    S. Bugu, S. Nishiyama, K. Kato, Y. Liu, S. Murakami, T. Mori, T. Ferrus, and T. Kodera, 4.2 K sensitivity- tunable radio frequency reflectometry of a physically de- fined p-channel silicon quantum dot, Scientific Reports 11, 20039 (2021)

    2021

  6. [6]

    A. O. Denisov, G. Fuchs, S. W. Oh, and J. R. Petta, Dispersive readout of a silicon quantum device using an atomic force microscope-based RF gate sensor, Applied Physics Letters123, 093502 (2023)

    2023

  7. [7]

    Beilvert, N

    C. Beilvert, N. Vivien, C. Thomas, J. Charbonnier, E. Deschaseaux, F. Badets, and J.-P. Michel, Broadband RF characterization and modeling of superconducting coplanar waveguides, IEEE Transactions on Applied Su- perconductivity35, 1 (2024)

    2024

  8. [8]

    A. J. Annunziata, D. F. Santavicca, L. Frunzio, G. Cate- lani, M. J. Rooks, A. Frydman, and D. E. Prober, Tunable superconducting nanoinductors, Nanotechnol- ogy21, 445202 (2010)

    2010

  9. [9]

    Maleeva, L

    N. Maleeva, L. Gr¨ unhaupt, T. Klein, F. L´ evy-Bertrand, O. Dupr´ e, M. Calvo, F. Valenti, P. Winkel, F. Friedrich, W. Wernsdorfer, A. V. Ustinov, H. Rotzinger, A. Mon- fardini, M. V. Fistul, and I. M. Pop, Circuit quantum electrodynamics of granular aluminum resonators, Na- ture Communications9, 3889 (2018)

    2018

  10. [10]

    T. H. Swift, F. Olivieri, G. Aizpurua-Iraola, J. Kirk- man, G. M. Noah, M. de Kruijf, F. E. von Horstig, A. Gomez-Saiz, J. J. L. Morton, and M. F. Gonzalez- Zalba, A superinductor in a deep sub-micron in- tegrated circuit, arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.13202 10.48550/arXiv.2507.13202 (2025), arXiv:2507.13202 [quant-ph]

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.13202 2025

  11. [11]

    J. I. Colless, A. C. Mahoney, J. M. Hornibrook, A. C. Do- herty, H. Lu, A. C. Gossard, and D. J. Reilly, Dispersive readout of a few-electron double quantum dot with fast RF gate sensors, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 046805 (2013)

    2013

  12. [12]

    C. H. Yang, R. C. C. Leon, J. C. C. Hwang, A. Saraiva, T. Tanttu, W. Huang, J. C. Lemyre, K. W. Chan, K. Y. Tan, F. E. Hudson, K. M. Itoh, A. Morello, M. Pioro- Ladri` ere, A. Laucht, and A. S. Dzurak, Operation of a silicon quantum processor unit cell above one kelvin, Na- ture580, 350 (2020)

    2020

  13. [13]

    Hamonic, M

    P. Hamonic, M. Toubeix, G. Haas, J. Nath, M. C. Dartiailh, B. Martinez, B. Bertrand, H. Niebojewski, M. Vinet, C. B¨ auerle, F. Balestro, T. Meunier, and M. Urdampilleta, Single-shot in situ readout of a spin qubit unit cell, Nature Electronics 10.1038/s41928-026- 01654-9 (2026)

    doi:10.1038/s41928-026- 2026

  14. [14]

    L. C. Camenzind, S. Geyer, A. Fuhrer, R. J. Warbur- ton, D. M. Zumb¨ uhl, and A. V. Kuhlmann, A hole spin qubit in a fin field-effect transistor above 4 kelvin, Nature Electronics5, 178 (2022)

    2022

  15. [15]

    M. F. Gonzalez-Zalba, S. de Franceschi, E. Charbon, T. Meunier, M. Vinet, and A. S. Dzurak, Scaling silicon- based quantum computing using CMOS technology, Na- ture Electronics4, 872 (2021)

    2021

  16. [16]

    Ferrero and U

    A. Ferrero and U. Pisani, Two-port network analyzer cal- ibration using an unknown ‘thru’, IEEE Microwave and Guided Wave Letters2, 505 (1992)

    1992

  17. [17]

    Peruzzo, A

    M. Peruzzo, A. Trioni, F. Hassani, M. Zemlicka, and J. M. Fink, Surpassing the resistance quantum with a geometric superinductor, Physical Review Applied14, 044055 (2020)

    2020

  18. [18]

    Probst, F

    S. Probst, F. B. Song, P. A. Bushev, A. V. Ustinov, and M. Weides, Efficient and robust analysis of complex scat- tering data under noise in microwave resonators, Review of Scientific Instruments86, 024706 (2015)

    2015

  19. [19]

    D. M. Pozar,Microwave Engineering, 4th ed. (Wiley, 2011)

    2011

  20. [20]

    Tinkham,Introduction to Superconductivity, 2nd ed

    M. Tinkham,Introduction to Superconductivity, 2nd ed. (Dover Publications, Mineola, NY, 2004)

    2004

  21. [21]

    C. Song, T. W. Heitmann, M. P. DeFeo, K. Yu, R. Mc- Dermott, M. Neeley, J. M. Martinis, and B. L. T. Plourde, Microwave response of vortices in superconduct- ing thin films of Re and Al, Physical Review B79, 174512 (2009)

    2009

  22. [22]

    S. Kwon, A. F. Roudsari, O. W. B. Benningshof, Y.-C. Tang, H. R. Mohebbi, I. A. J. Taminiau, D. Langenberg, S. Lee, G. Nichols, D. G. Cory, and G.-X. Miao, Magnetic field dependent microwave losses in superconducting nio- bium microstrip resonators, Journal of Applied Physics 124, 033903 (2018)

    2018

  23. [23]

    C. W. Zollitsch, J. O’Sullivan, O. W. Kennedy, G. Dold, and J. J. L. Morton, Tuning high-Q superconducting res- onators by magnetic field reorientation, AIP Advances9, 125225 (2019)

    2019

  24. [24]

    C. R. H. McRae, H. Wang, J. Gao, M. R. Vissers, T. Brecht, A. Dunsworth, D. P. Pappas, and J. Mutus, Materials loss measurements using superconducting mi- crowave resonators, Review of Scientific Instruments91, 091101 (2020)

    2020

  25. [25]

    D. C. Mattis and J. Bardeen, Theory of the anomalous skin effect in normal and superconducting metals, Phys- ical Review111, 412 (1958)

    1958

  26. [26]

    Gao,The Physics of Superconducting Microwave Res- onators, Ph.D

    J. Gao,The Physics of Superconducting Microwave Res- onators, Ph.D. thesis, California Institute of Technology (2008)

    2008

  27. [27]

    Zmuidzinas, Superconducting microresonators: Physics and applications, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics3, 169 (2012)

    J. Zmuidzinas, Superconducting microresonators: Physics and applications, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics3, 169 (2012)

    2012

  28. [28]

    P. J. de Visser, J. J. A. Baselmans, P. Diener, S. J. C. Yates, A. Endo, and T. M. Klapwijk, Number fluctua- tions of sparse quasiparticles in a superconductor, Phys- ical Review Letters106, 167004 (2011)

    2011

  29. [29]

    A. P. Zhuravel, C. Kurter, A. V. Ustinov, and S. M. An- lage, Unconventional rf photoresponse from a supercon- ducting spiral resonator, arXiv preprint arXiv:1203.3998 (2012), arXiv:1203.3998. 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  30. [30]

    B. G. Ghamsari, J. Abrahams, S. Remillard, and S. M. Anlage, High-temperature superconducting spiral res- onator for metamaterial applications, arXiv preprint arXiv:1210.4080 (2012), arXiv:1210.4080

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  31. [31]

    Medahinne, Y

    M. Medahinne, Y. P. Kandel, S. Thapa Magar, E. Cham- pion, J. M. Nichol, and M. S. Blok, Magnetic-field- tolerant superconducting spiral resonators for circuit qed, Physical Review Applied23, 014070 (2025)

    2025

  32. [32]

    J. Gao, M. Daal, J. M. Martinis, A. Vayonakis, J. Zmuidzinas, B. Sadoulet, B. A. Mazin, P. K. Day, and H. G. Leduc, Experimental study of the kinetic induc- tance fraction of superconducting coplanar waveguide, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment559, 585 (2006)

    2006

  33. [33]

    T. M. Bretz-Sullivan, R. M. Lewis, A. L. Lima-Sharma, D. Lidsky, C. M. Smyth, C. T. Harris, M. Venuti, S. Eley, and T.-M. Lu, High kinetic inductance NbTiN supercon- ducting transmission line resonators in the very thin film limit, Applied Physics Letters121, 052602 (2022)

    2022

  34. [34]

    Frasca, I

    S. Frasca, I. N. Arabadzhiev, S. Y. Bros de Puechre- don, F. Oppliger, V. Jouanny, R. Musio, M. Scigliuzzo, F. Minganti, P. Scarlino, and E. Charbon, High-kinetic inductance NbN films for high-quality compact super- conducting resonators, arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13930 (2023), arXiv:2302.13930 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  35. [35]

    Roitman, L

    A. Roitman, L. Burlachkov, A. Sharoni, A. Shaulov, and Y. Yeshurun, Suppression of magnetic vortex losses in submicron NbN coplanar waveguide resonators, Scientific Reports14, 26444 (2024)

    2024

  36. [36]

    S. S. Mohan, M. d. M. Hershenson, S. P. Boyd, and T. H. Lee, Simple accurate expressions for planar spiral induc- tances, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits34, 1419 (1999)

    1999

  37. [37]

    H. A. Wheeler, Simple inductance formulas for radio coils, Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers16, 1398 (1928)

    1928

  38. [38]

    M. S. Khalil, M. J. A. Stoutimore, F. C. Wellstood, and K. D. Osborn, An analysis method for asymmetric res- onator transmission applied to superconducting devices, Journal of Applied Physics111, 054510 (2012)

    2012

  39. [39]

    Naishadham, Experimental equivalent-circuit model- ing of SMD inductors for printed circuit applications, IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility 43, 557 (2001)

    K. Naishadham, Experimental equivalent-circuit model- ing of SMD inductors for printed circuit applications, IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility 43, 557 (2001)

    2001

  40. [40]

    ˇZlebiˇ c, N

    ˇC. ˇZlebiˇ c, N. Blaˇ z, A. B. Meni´ canin, L. D.ˇZivanov, and M. S. Damnjanovi´ c, Application for fast determination of inductor’s electrical characteristics from S-parameters, in 2014 IEEE 29th International Conference on Microelec- tronics (MIEL)(2014) pp. 431–434

    2014

  41. [41]

    F. E. Terman,Radio Engineers’ Handbook(McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1943)

    1943

  42. [42]

    K. K. Likharev, The formation of a mixed state in planar semiconductor films, Radiophysics and Quantum Elec- tronics14, 722 (1971)

    1971

  43. [43]

    G. M. Maksimova, Mixed state and critical current in narrow semiconducting films, Physics of the Solid State 40, 1607 (1998)

    1998

  44. [44]

    E. H. Brandt and M. Indenbom, Type-II-superconductor strip with current in a perpendicular magnetic field, Physical Review B48, 12893 (1993)

    1993

  45. [45]

    K. H. Kuit, J. R. Kirtley, W. van der Veur, C. G. Mole- naar, F. J. G. Roesthuis, A. G. P. Troeman, J. R. Clem, H. Hilgenkamp, H. Rogalla, and J. Flokstra, Vortex trap- ping and expulsion in thin-film YBa 2Cu3O7−δ strips, Physical Review B77, 134504 (2008)

    2008

  46. [46]

    G. Stan, S. B. Field, and J. M. Martinis, Critical field for complete vortex expulsion from narrow superconducting strips, Physical Review Letters92, 097003 (2004)

    2004

  47. [47]

    L. N. Bulaevskii, M. J. Graf, C. D. Batista, and V. G. Ko- gan, Vortex-induced dissipation in narrow current-biased thin-film superconducting strips, Physical Review B83, 144526 (2011)

    2011

  48. [48]

    K. H. Kuit, J. R. Kirtley, J. R. Clem, H. Rogalla, and J. Flokstra, Vortex trapping and expulsion in thin-film type-II superconducting strips, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity19, 3537 (2009)

    2009